Kindy v. Green
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Kalamazoo Circuit. This was an action of replevin, brought by Green and McIntyre against Kindy, for an undivided one-half of a portable saw-mill, which interest they claimed to have purchased of him, the other undivided interest belonging to a third party. The cansé was tried by a jury and verdict rendered for the plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
Error to Kalamazoo Circuit. This was an action of replevin, brought by Green and McIntyre against Kindy, for an undivided one-half of a portable saw-mill, which interest they claimed to have purchased of him, the other undivided interest belonging to a third party. The cansé was tried by a jury and verdict rendered for the plaintiffs. The defendant moved in arrest of judgment, on the ground that replevin would not lie for an undivided interest in property in its nature indivisible, and his-motion having been denied and judgment rendered for the plaintiffs for the value of the property,…
1Opinion of the Court
The Oouet
held that replevin would not lie for an undivided interest in a chattel where the execution of the writ will operate to deprive a co-tenant whose title is undisputed of his right of possession.
Judgment reversed, with costs of both courts.
2Cited by7 opinions
- Phipps v. TaylorOregon Supreme Court · 1887
- Sutherland v. CarterMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- Parsons v. KimmelMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
- Smith-McCord Dry-goods Co. v. BurkeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1901
- Fell v. TaylorSuperior Court of Delaware · 1900
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.